• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Armed Militia Members take over Federal Building in Oregon

Page 61 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Not good at all. I wonder if any of the jurors will be talking to the press. I honestly would like to hear if they simply thought the prosecution failed to prove the charges or if they bought into the jury nullification crap.


Hopefully for the next one, and there will be a next one, that the feds find a better balance between de-escalation and allowing another circus.
 
Thought just occurred to me to compare these guys to inner city rioters. Or more specifically the agitators of said riots.
Now granted, they caused less harm and did so in a remote location.

But my question is... what do participants in a riot get charged with, and should it be viewed similarly, or even as a lesser offense given the location?
 
As a resident of rural Oregon, I'm not surprised one bit. All they had to do was get jurors from anywhere but Portland and they were pretty much guaranteed a walk on this. As a believer in the Law of Unintended Consequences, you can bet that the Federal government will have a much different response the next time a federal facility is occupied. This was a bad decision by my fellow citizens in Oregon and it's going to come back to bite us all.

Frankly, it's an embarrassment.
 
So occupying federal property with weapons while threatening agents if they come near is legal. (If white)
0fc148d53370e35bcc81c5adaffbaa77.jpg
 
Last edited:
I hope that jury was some sort of cosmic accident. Letting these guys walk away invites more of the same. WTF were these people thinking?
 
This is crazy. Hopefully the feds do what they do best and bring up a whole new round of charges. I am sure there were a lot more things they could be charged with.
 
jackstar7 said:
Look, these are some white people, so we know they didn't really mean any harm.
Click to expand...

If you mean that they're likely the same culture as the Bundies, that's true. Of course you and other white people are not.

Humans do tend to segregate and that leads to mono-ethnic cultures... which means a Western yeehawdist is likely white... and a Chicago thug is likely... and people pick up on those stereotypes but it's not a racial issue. It's social. It's cultural. It's ideals. Association runs far deeper than skin color. It's about who you are, where you come from. It's our lack of diversity that makes those cultural issues appear to be divided on race, but at its core race has nothing to do with it.
 
Bitek said:
I don't always agree with the tactics and goals of BLM, but shit like this proves they do have a point.
Click to expand...

Yes, can you imagine what would have happened if a group of armed black people or armed muslims took the exact same actions?

Does anyone here think they would have been acquitted? (Assuming they survived the original incident)
 
Jaskalas said:
Thought just occurred to me to compare these guys to inner city rioters. Or more specifically the agitators of said riots.
Now granted, they caused less harm and did so in a remote location.

But my question is... what do participants in a riot get charged with, and should it be viewed similarly, or even as a lesser offense given the location?
Click to expand...
rioters usually get charged with unlawful assembly or peace disturbance, which is a minor offense. These guys got charged with federal crimes. The only similarity between rioters and the Bundy's is that they both anti-government movements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top